Global Governance of Education and Training: As Reviewed from Jomtien via Incheon to New York

Autor/inn/en	Chung, Bong Gun; Jeon, In Sun; Lee, Rebekah H.; Lee, Inyoung; Yoo, Sung Sang
Titel	Global Governance of Education and Training: As Reviewed from Jomtien via Incheon to New York
Quelle	In: Asia Pacific Education Review, 19 (2018) 3, S.319-336 (18 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Yoo, Sung Sang)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1598-1037
DOI	10.1007/s12564-018-9544-7
Schlagwörter	Educational Administration; Global Approach; Governance; Sustainable Development; Efficiency; Power Structure; Equal Education; Access to Education; Accountability; Agenda Setting; Economic Development; Educational Change; Foreign Countries + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Bildungsverwaltung; Schuladministration; Schulverwaltung; Globales Denken; Education; Educational policy; Financing; Steuerung; Bildung; Erziehung; Bildungspolitik; Finanzierung; Nachhaltige Entwicklung; Effectiveness; Effektivität; Wirkungsgrad; Access; Zugang; Bildungszugang; Verantwortung; Wirtschaftsentwicklung; Bildungsreform; Ausland
Abstract	By applying the concepts, practices, and limits of the theories of global governance of education, this study tries to reveal the characteristics of education for all (EFA), the millennium development goals (MDGs), and the sustainable development goals (SDGs) from the dimensions of norms and rules, accountability, transparency, participation, and effectiveness and efficiency. For the retrospective analysis of the global agendas, the authors use the modified definition of Rametsteiner's good governance to examine selected literature of academic analyses and publicized official documents and statistics. In doing so, the study postulates a complex web of power holders in the agenda-making process on the global level, which functions as a mechanism to exert significant influence to re-orient education agendas in the global community. The study finds that from the perspective of global governance of education, the governance of EFA was weak in the dimensions of accountability and effectiveness. MDG governance was stronger than EFA's, but this strength cannot be interpreted as good, or ideal, governance. The actual process of MDG agenda setting, despite the pervading rhetoric of country ownership and development partnership, is overwhelmingly donor-centered, which contradicts the dimensions of norms and rules as well as participation. The analysis on the governance of EFA and the MDGs verify that power asymmetry is inevitable in a multi-stakeholder governance approach. Such contradictory relations among the dimensions of good global governance puts SDG 4 in a dilemma. Therefore, the study emphasizes the importance of securing effectiveness and accountability for SDG 4. Otherwise, the future of the education SDG will be unpromising. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01